Apple 'Questioning' the Future of its Mac Pro Line?

[Lone Deranger]

Yeah, that sounds like something I have yet to even begin to approach. If it has anything to do with simplifying complex scenes during render time, I'm still pretty well ignorant.

I was taking the picture literally, as in "I just created a sphere primitive, grabbed two faces, and subdivided them for extra detail in those subsections". That's something you obviously never want to do, because when you subsurf or subdivide the entire model, you'll get pinching in those faces surrounding the bits with the denser mesh.

Case in point (because we all love pretty pictures):

Image

Yeah, that’s what you get in modo because that’s how the SDS algorithm interpolates ngons sharing borders with quads. In PRman however the grids are treated as separate entities and do not physically share border edges. Hence the name dicing.

PRman is a REYES engine. Which stands for ‘Render Everything You Ever Saw’. Which also means anything you don’t see is dropped very early on during rendering, before any shading occurs.
PRman is quite ancient, as far as render engines go (30 years old). It was developed when Framebuffers and Ram were counted in the KiloBytes rather than GigaBytes. So one of the design specifications was that it had to be extremely aggressive with memory management, which lead to the whole culling, busting, dicing strategy.

Mind you, this is RenderMan/PRman stuff… The modo renderer is an entirely different beast altogether (and very cool indeed).

 

[JazzyGB1]

I'm not sure what Apple will do in the end, however Apple is a for profit corporation. If the Mac Pro isn't adding anything to the bottom line then it is hard to make a case to continue it. The reason why we haven't seen much investment in this product line is because they sell so few. The real money is in the iDevices and that is where Apple needs to focus most of their resources in the future. The portables, Mac Mini and iMac offer 95% of computer shoppers what they need. The very very few that still need to purchase a Mac Pro are not going to be a focus going forward. Even if Apple lost those few customers it would make little difference on the bottom line. Possibly it might even benefit them not to be wasting engineering resources on a very slow selling product line and shift those resources to things that are selling like hot cakes.

I Disagree entirely with most of what you just said.
First of all there is absolutely no evidence that the Mac Pro isn't profitable.
It's design has remained largely unchanged since 2006, so R&D costs won't be high - it might actually be one of the most profitable models they sell on a per unit basis.
It's also the Apple flagship product - their standard bearing behemoth.
Take it away and Apple loses a little of its aspirational status - something which is a big factor in helping to sell ALL of its products, including iPads, iPods & iPhones.
Also 'the few' you refer too is still millions of customers.
You as an individual may purchase an iMac & MacBook Air, but some companies purchase dozens of Mac Pro's in a single order. Not to mention iPads and iPhones for their employees etc etc
So losing the 'professional' would make a HUGE difference to Apple's bottom line and would have a dramatic knock on effect on their image too.
Lose the Pro sales, and eventually you'll lose the consumers sales too as it would tarnish the aspirational status that nearly all Apple products currently enjoy.
Even if Mac Pro's themselves don't make much money as a product line, indirectly it helps them take a lot more.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

It's design has remained largely unchanged since 2006, so R&D costs won't be high - it might actually be one of the most profitable models they sell on a per unit basis.

A very unscientific measure of how profitable a Mac product is how it compares to a similarly priced competitor. Apple is very competitive on the (dual processor) machines when compared to PC hardware of similar spec. I can't imagine they are making the large profits like they are on their other product lines.

It's also the Apple flagship product - their standard bearing behemoth.

This hasn't been true for many years.

Take it away and Apple loses a little of its aspirational status - something which is a big factor in helping to sell ALL of its products, including iPads, iPods & iPhones.

That's the iMac or MBP, not the tower. Those are the products that people see in movies and out everywhere in public with the apple logo on it. My local Apple store didn't even have a pro on display the last time I went. Apple isn't even giving it retail space.

Also 'the few' you refer too is still millions of customers.

I believe estimates over the past few years do not put Mac Pro orders in the millions of sales per year, which is what apple gets with its other product lines.

You as an individual may purchase an iMac & MacBook Air, but some companies purchase dozens of Mac Pro's in a single order.

And then they keep them for 5-6 years because they were so expensive, and then replace them with iMacs and MBPs, which they order more frequently.

Not to mention iPads and iPhones for their employees etc etc

Now you're talking about Apple's flagship products.

So losing the 'professional' would make a HUGE difference to Apple's bottom line and would have a dramatic knock on effect on their image too.

Apple can to just fine without the Pro. Really, they've essentially been doing that for some time already.

Lose the Pro sales, and eventually you'll lose the consumers sales too as it would tarnish the aspirational status that nearly all Apple products currently enjoy.

Lose the niche, gain the majority.

Even if Mac Pro's themselves don't make much money as a product line, indirectly it helps them take a lot more.

That's the case with any Mac. But when someone buys a cheaper, non tower Mac, they have more money to get another Apple product with it. At one of my former jobs, the boss used the budget of replacing one mac pro to get two iMacs instead. That's got to be the story happening all over the place.

 

[pondosinatra]

...and I'm questioning my future with Apple...

 

[bill001]

Isnt it strange that the ones who own mac pros in this discussion have not complained about the price? I never did anywhere. Never heard a Mac Pro owner say it...

But more than enough people all over this place who don't have one call it overpriced...overkill...that we don't need anything more than they have etc.

Ha ha, I have a mac pro and I complain about the price! But it isn't totally Apple's fault if Intel is charging $1600 per processor x 2, then I'd say some of that is Intel's fault! It just seems like Apple is using boutique processors in the Mac Pro line, hence the boutique prices, but does that processor in the real world really gain much over some other less expensive choices?

----------

"Apple can to just fine without the Pro. Really, they've essentially been doing that for some time already."

Yes, Apple can do just fine without the Pro, but those of us who depend on what it offers, cannot do fine without it.

 

[xgman]

Yes, Apple can do just fine without the Pro, but those of us who depend on what it offers, cannot do fine without it.

I think Apple will end up offering some high end system above the current imac lineup to compensate for the MP loss. Personally, I would give up the Xeon's and ECC ram as long as I could get top of the line (more than 4 core) performance with min 24GB ram, NO monitor attached, and multi drives that don't rely on Thunderbolt. I don't care what the case looks like.

 

[milo]

Apple should move the Mac Pro to a single, highest-end reasonably possible motherboard and cut down on the configurable options to simplify production.

Then create a larger cased version of the Mac mini with 2 easy to swap 3.5" drive bays, at least 4 RAM slots and a faster quad core i7 than the current mini server. Ugh, unfortunately this would require a different motherboard - maybe keep the RAM slots the same, if that would allow reusing the current mini motherboard.

I suspect most people buying a Mac Pro, truly want the highest end Mac possible, and that segment could be captured by making the Pro hi-end only.

There is probably a smaller contingent just looking for a slightly more powerful and more configurable desktop than the mini Mac without a built-in monitor. That segment could be captured with a souped up mini with a bigger case.

Fantastic ideas. The main problem with the MP is that the dual processor models are really the only ones that give competitive performance for the price, the entry models are way overpriced and underperforming.

Make the MP just the dual chip 8/12/16 core models. And make a decent no-frills, smaller single chip machine. A couple open PCI slots, a couple drive bays (with SSD mounting options included). The imac has outperformed the base MP at a lower price for a long time now, just make a model with iMac specs and CPU options. Taking the screen out should save more money than it costs to add a couple drive bays, PCI slots, and a couple more ram slots (6-8), plus the savings of not having to use mobile parts. Make the case cheap and simple to keep costs down. They'd sell those things like hotcakes, probably quite a bit more than the mini (and it wouldn't have to cost more than the mini, it could even be less if they did it right).

Isnt it strange that the ones who own mac pros in this discussion have not complained about the price?

I have, but only on the single chip models. They're poor value (and definitely the weak part of the MP lineup) but the dual chip models give good performance for that money.

 

[xgman]

This is a pretty popular thread. Maybe there is more interest in the Mac Pro than most have thought.

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Yes, Apple can do just fine without the Pro, but those of us who depend on what it offers, cannot do fine without it.

Unless you rely on Apple exclusive software like FCP and Logic, you can do just fine without a Mac Pro and use a windows machine. The rest of the stuff (3d programs, adobe suite, compositors) run just fine on Windows.

When I'm working in C4d I forget about the OS I'm using until I go to shut down.

 

[milo]

A very unscientific measure of how profitable a Mac product is how it compares to a similarly priced competitor. Apple is very competitive on the (dual processor) machines when compared to PC hardware of similar spec. I can't imagine they are making the large profits like they are on their other product lines.

Or another possibility is that the competitors are marking up those machines as much as Apple is. They're taking a bigger profit on them since they are niche machines and sell in smaller quantities. As you say, a VERY unscientific measure - I'd say likely a completely meaningless measure.

Not to mention that the MPs aren't as competitive as they used to be - when they first shipped (and at each update) the dual socket machines compared well pricewise to PCs but since then the PCs have had upgrades and price drops while the macs haven't.

 

[Wild-Bill]

No Mac Pro = HACK Pro for me

If Apple dumps the Mac Pro, then my next update will be a HACKINTOSH.
I will certainly NOT go from my current 2008 Mac Pro to an iMac. If I want to see myself I'll use the mirror in my bathroom. I don't need a glossy screen to do that. Besides, I already have two 24" (non-glossy) monitors, three 1-TB drives in RAID-0, another 750 GB for music, and an SSD and a 2-TB for backups stuffed in the second optical bay. I don't think there's room in an iMac for all that.

I'll just have to immerse myself in the Hackint0sh community and learn what the best dual-chip motherboard is and associated hardware to build a screamin' Hack Pro.

(and I'll turn off auto-updates) and wait until the community finds fixes. I don't mind. Heck, My Mac Pro is still on Snow Leopard (which I prefer). I use Spaces all the time, and last I checked, Lion doesn't have spaces.

 

[TwitchOSX]

This BETTER not be true. Dell doesn't sell a ton of Alienware machines either but they still sell those.

----------

If Apple dumps the Mac Pro, then my next update will be a HACKINTOSH.
I will certainly NOT go from my current 2008 Mac Pro to an iMac. If I want to see myself I'll use the mirror in my bathroom. I don't need a glossy screen to do that. Besides, I already have two 24" (non-glossy) monitors, three 1-TB drives in RAID-0, another 750 GB for music, and an SSD and a 2-TB for backups stuffed in the second optical bay. I don't think there's room in an iMac for all that.

I'll just have to immerse myself in the Hackint0sh community and learn what the best dual-chip motherboard is and associated hardware to build a screamin' Hack Pro.

(and I'll turn off auto-updates) and wait until the community finds fixes. I don't mind. Heck, My Mac Pro is still on Snow Leopard (which I prefer). I use Spaces all the time, and last I checked, Lion doesn't have spaces.

I was thinking the same. As for Spaces.. I hate spaces. Nice try, but I was using Desktop Manager in 10.4 which allowed me to have 8 virtual desktops AND have a pager to switch to those desktops. Unfortunately, it doesnt work in 10.5 and I haven't been able to find anything else that was like it. That sucks.

 

[vitzr]

This is a pretty popular thread. Maybe there is more interest in the Mac Pro than most have thought.

Yes you are absolutely correct. Those of us who rely on it, and have for years, are indeed a group of Apple's most vociferous supporters. We have been with Apple through thick and thin (truly).

Speaking only for myself, going back to the early Mac Quadra days, Apple has been my computer of choice. I have personally embraced and purchased nearly every computer (laptop and desktop) Apple has produced. Just think about that.

I do not say that to brag, it's simply a fact. I have the resources to buy whatever tech gear I need and want and that has always been Apple first, and PC's second. In addition I authorize all the purchases for our cross platform design and engineering firm. We employ over 600 engineers and design experts. That's a lot of Mac Pros and less that 20% of it is PC workstations.

The newer iUsers may scoff, but the fact is the MacPro has an ardent and very loyal following. Yes presently looking at the scale of Apple, the Mac Pro may seem like peanuts but it's a core portion of the overall image that Apple maintains.

Let's not forget that many of us reside at the high end of Apple customers demographics. We have families, friends and we are the "go to experts" amongst our huge sphere of influence. When asked we always suggest Apple products.

If Apple dumps us, they are dumping a part of their heritage and legacy that would be a shame to dispose of, as though it was yesterdays garbage.

If we are abandoned, the ripple effect will be larger than Apple may realize.

 

[xgman]

Diglloyd wrote a pretty good article on this rumor. Here is an excerpt. He makes some good points.

"Alienating the user base — a strategic blunder

Eliminating the Mac Pro would alienate high end users (including me), who really do need the Mac Pro. Such users are key influencers who would be hung out to dry, no doubt with assertions from Apple that some replacement “solution” is just as good, but would in reality be a compromise and frustration for high-end users.

Elimination of the Mac Pro would be a long term strategic mistake that in my mind would signal the coming demise of Apple (believe it or not), not for the loss of the Mac Pro on its own, but because it’s a warning shot for all high end users that their needs are not important— so look elsewhere. And thus a warning shot to any user thinking about brand loyalty, and building a professional solution around Apple products. Death to the ecosystem. No company prospers forever, and the first step is failing to honor apparently small market segments that matter much more than bean counters realize.

Dovetailing into the whole thing (as Martin notes), is the consumerization of everything, including the features in Lion. My Mac is not an iPhone, but clearly that is not understood at Apple. The Mac is getting harder to use, not easier, and all that eye candy being thrown in is not easier, it’s more confusing, something I see firsthand with friends and clients. As Exhibit A, I present iTunes, a kitchen-sink mess.

When a company steps away from respecting a core part of its user base reliant upon the Mac Pro (many key influencers in there!), Apple loses their support in many ways; it’s a crack in the door for alternatives. Competition is slobbering over the iPhone and iPad market. They will succeed sooner or later (probably later), but Apple does not need to accelerate the process by alienating professional users."

Link to full article: http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20111101_1-EndOfLifeMacPro.html

 

[Lara F]

But then the $999 11" MacBook Air became the "cheapest" Mac laptop.. and didn't it quickly become a best seller?

You're right... Apple stopped selling the $999 plastic white Macbook... but it was replaced by something much hotter.

Apple still has a $999 price point... and the Air is a much better computer than the white MacBook in most respects.

Going through the thread so apologies for responding to something like 20 pages back. I still disagree that the Air was an adequate replacement for the MacBook at the same price point. For $999 you get an 11" screen, 64GB space and 2GB nonupgradeable RAM. Try living with that as your sole computer. For someone who's looking for a single laptop (and not a companion to an already owned desktop) the options have gotten more expensive. And that's unfortunate IMO.

 

[macsmurf]

Let's not forget that many of us reside at the high end of Apple customers demographics. We have families, friends and we are the "go to experts" amongst our huge sphere of influence. When asked we always suggest Apple products.

What products would you recommend if Apple drops the Mac Pro? When someone asks me I normally recommend Apple because they're great products - not because I'm loyal to a cooperation *shivers*

 

[Gomff]

Heck, My Mac Pro is still on Snow Leopard (which I prefer). I use Spaces all the time, and last I checked, Lion doesn't have spaces.

I'm no Lion evangelist but Lion does pretty much still have spaces. My preferred way of working is to assign each space to a CTRL+number key which you can still do in Lion.

Having said that, I still use Snow Leopard since Apple decided to artificially kill off Logic Pro 8 in Lion but that's another thing altogether

 

[derbothaus]

I'm no Lion evangelist but Lion does pretty much still have spaces. My preferred way of working is to assign each space to a CTRL+number key which you can still do in Lion.

Having said that, I still use Snow Leopard since Apple decided to artificially kill off Logic Pro 8 in Lion but that's another thing altogether

Buy the upgrade. Problem solved. 9 is better anyway. Can't believe this debunked thread is still going.

 

[Umbongo]

Newegg said out of stock yesterday, but I see that it indeed does have the W3680 for $600. I cannot find it in stock in the UK though.

I am still curious, even with this info, how you would build me the machine for a 1/4 of the price and how you would handle the 3 year repair / replacement and support? Hmmm?

Again, his point was that as a professional maybe they have some hardware knowledge and can build it, get OS X running and do it for 25% of the cost. That's the sacrifice you make. Not suitable for a studio, but certainly possible for those just managing a single system and people are generating income with hackintoshes.

 

[TwitchOSX]

Looks like I'm going to be getting this within a month:

Refurbished Mac Pro 2.4GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon
Originally released August 2010
Two 2.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Westmere" processor
6GB (6 x 1GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 ECC memory
1TB Serial ATA 7200 rpm
18x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB GDDR5 memory

 

[Macinposh]

"Alienating the user base — a strategic blunder


When a company steps away from respecting a core part of its user base reliant upon the Mac Pro (many key influencers in there!), Apple loses their support in many ways; it’s a crack in the door for alternatives.

This.

As a "power user" since 1994 in the visual media business, I have gathered my own view on the industry. Been working with the music, video, vfx, design & photography during that time and the has been the Icon ouf our generation. Period.

Innumerable has been the records,films, magazines and ads that have been created with them. The important bitz has not been the machines, though. It has been the guys and gals, The Ones that has defined what is "In & Out" and what is "Cool".
Especially in the last years it has been they that have been the early adopters of new apple tech, the forefront runners that everyone has looked upon as the "cool kids".

Now, is Apple really ditching that user base???!! Really??!!


Ok,ok.
A lot of business, say, ad companies & designers have switched to lighter setups, the iMacs and Macbook Pros. You get the lighter **** done with them, you know keynotes, on the road recordings, web design etc.

But when it comes down to the Work,the Heavy lifting it is the big box that people confide to.


I can see the apple pulling the plug on the Big Ones, though.
They have evolved to the point that they are looking for the Consumers of the media, on the expense of the Creators. With Creators I mean the Real Creators of Content, not the "creators" that many think with the masses providing the "content".

Sad day if it would happen, and damn interesting to see where all the souls will head if that happens.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Well, I can't say I'm shocked at the suggestion. I've been saying this for years that the Mac has been going to "consumer" and away from "Pro" (except in name) for a LONG time now. Ironically, I thought if Jobs were to leave Apple (or sadly die), that might mean a return to more conventional designs, at least in part since it seemed to be Jobs himself that hated the so-called "trucks" of computing that some of us WANT. I guess his choice of a CEO to take over for him saw it his way.

However, I find the 'lack of sales' line disingenuous since the Mac Pro is completely priced out of the CONSUMER market (just not realistic by the cost of towers in the PC realm and therefore the Hackintosh ones as well) and yet lacks many of the features that Pros who would actually be willing to pay those premiums have been asking for such as multiple FW pipelines (and no Thunderbolt is currently to be found), more expansion slots, eSATA ports, USB3, etc. etc. The most basic law of business is to know your customer base and Apple has been ignoring this one for some time.

To get more tower sales, Apple needs two models, one for consumers in the $1500 range as an alternative to being forced to use underpowered all-in-one iMacs with slower mobile hardware in them and one made for true professionals at a higher price level that has the features they've been asking for. There is simply no way that Apple doesn't have the resources to deliver such a change and I think they would find such models would be far more profitable than one Mac Pro that almost NO ONE currently WANTS (although some are more or less forced to use it out of no other options). It would be petty cash (less than one lawsuit) to make such changes using more or less off-the-shelf parts for the most part. Given Steve's choice of a CEO to continue his "form over function" vision, I doubt we'll see another Mac Pro unless someone comes up with something simply stunning in design looks. Ask yourself if a woman would likely want one in their house in plain site and if the answer is no, then Apple probably isn't going to make one in the near future.

 

[JazzyGB1]

A very unscientific measure of how profitable a Mac product is how it compares to a similarly priced competitor.

I didn't compare it to a similarly priced competitor???
I simply stated that it's design had remained very similar for 5 years, so it might actually be more profitable on a per unit basis than other Mac models.

This hasn't been true for many years.

You're confusing popularity with status. The iMac is definitely the most popular Mac desktop and very powerful too, but Apple's flagship is their 12 core monster Mac Pro and it will remain so until they release a better Mac Pro or a more Powerful iMac.

That's the iMac or MBP, not the tower. Those are the products that people see in movies and out everywhere in public with the apple logo on it. My local Apple store didn't even have a pro on display the last time I went. Apple isn't even giving it retail space.

Really?
Maybe they'd sold out!
The Apple Store in London had two 27" displays hooked up to the Mac Pro when I last visited earlier this year. It was running Final Cut and had plenty of people swooning over it. iMac's may be what you see in the movies, but the Mac Pro MAKES the movies!

I believe estimates over the past few years do not put Mac Pro orders in the millions of sales per year, which is what apple gets with its other product lines.

What estimates might these be?
Are these the fictitious estimates grabbed out of thin air to suit your argument?
Link please.

And then they keep them for 5-6 years because they were so expensive, and then replace them with iMacs and MBPs, which they order more frequently.

My company upgraded from G5's to Mac Pro's in 2006 and upgraded the Mac Pro's again in 2009 and will upgrade again in 2012 if new Mac Pro's are announced. That's 3 years between purchases - I don't think that's significantly longer than most people keep an iMac.
Of course as they are more expandable, they will remain relevant much longer than an all in one iMac will, but that's hardly a criticism is it?
You can update your graphics card or display whenever you like with a Mac Pro. Adding USB3 or eSATA is a breeze. To do these things on an iMac you have to sell it and buy a new one.

Another demonstration of why the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship computer.

Apple can to just fine without the Pro. Really, they've essentially been doing that for some time already.

Says who?
Mac Pro's are being sold everyday - who are you to say people don't need them?
The amount of responses on this board is a good indication of how important they are to some.
Of course sales might have slowed recently as (like the iPhone 4), people hold off buying in anticipation of the rumoured release of new models, but that's perfectly normal.

Lose the niche, gain the majority.

You gain the majority by keeping the niche.
The niche now is tomorrows mainstream.
You lose the majority when you have no niche, it's the niche that keeps you interesting, cool and aspirational.

That's the case with any Mac. But when someone buys a cheaper, non tower Mac, they have more money to get another Apple product with it. At one of my former jobs, the boss used the budget of replacing one mac pro to get two iMacs instead. That's got to be the story happening all over the place.

Nonsense. Just because 2 iMacs were more suitable for your boss, doesn't make it the case for everyone using a Mac Pro.
If your boss could manage with an iMac, he probably didn't need a Mac Pro to begin with.

Most who really need a Mac Pro, simply could not get by with any other Mac product - it's that simple.

 

[krazygoat]

Maybe it is just a perception difference. I have a core i7 iMac at home but I don't really consider it fast enough to do the work I do, but it is awesome for dealing with my massive photography library and since I am not a professional photographer I don't need a professional screen and I consider the Apple screens to be some of the best consumer screens.

But all our developers are from Disney Interactive so I think they are used to a certain level of performance and interactivity and I have worked through some stuff with them and I come from the film side of things and I have to say I would not want anything less than the 2010 Mac Pros that they got. The Radeon card works great for Unity but not so great with Pro 3D apps so some of our 3D guys are on Quadros which while fast for high-end 3D are slower on the game side but still plenty fast enough. Of course our level of detail may be different. When working with the characters for Bulletstorm they were just crushing Maya and Modo, Zbrush was better off but I was definitely wishing for a 12 core box. Like you said though once you get into something like Unity as long as you have a decent game card you are fine, but since we are bouncing back and forth so much it is just easier to have beasty boxes for the artists. We are also looking at Mari in addition to Zbrush and Mari just crushes machines but you can do texture and projection work that Zbrush can only dream of right now.

First off, I'm not a developer, I'm a hobbyist learning on my own time here, so I can't speak with 100% authority on a studio's entire workflow. What I can do is offer up what I've seen based on my experiences.

On my old Opteron, yeah, things did get a little chunkity once I get up into the 600-800,000 quad range in Modo, and about 2 million polys in Zbrush. It's still workable. I could make high quality assets on it. But it's not exactly what I'd call super smooth. Baking all my texture stages down could take about 15-20 minutes combined total.

But on my somewhat more recent i7 920? I can tear some crap up. I've seen Modo go up to 1.5 million polygons with barely a stutter, and I've subdivided to upwards of 6 million polys in Zbrush without it even batting an eye. That's a tremendous amount of geometry, and easily more than enough to make the highest quality game model. Provided you've done a decent job with your topology, you won't be baking out any jagged edges at that high of a mesh resolution.

For complex scenes in a game, you would've long since baked out your various bits and pieces to textures from your high res source, and poly decimated the meshes down into a less taxing form to be placed into your editor. It might be based on my limited experience, but I can't think of a single reason to go above 6 mil quads. Even in the high end world of pro game design, you'll still be working on one model at a time.

And this is just with a two generations old CPU, and 12 GB of ram. It won't be winning any speed awards anytime soon. But for game assets? It's more than enough.

Game design in general doesn't require more than a high end consumer PC. I mean hell. High end consumer PCs aren't exactly slow, they're just not as fast. You could even use an iMac for game design. Alot of people do. Just check out the Polycount and Luxology forums, and you'll see a few people getting by just fine. The only problem with the iMac is that it's more a high-end of the mid-end PC, and doesn't have nearly as much room to upgrade as you'd get out of a tower. But still, it works. And works well enough for the time being.

 

[trevorgant]

A Mac Pro or equivalent is still needed

I work in Television Production in the post world and am a current member of the Producers Guild of America. I have worked on numerous Television shows, for networks owned by Viacom, Twentieth Century Fox, and GE/Comcast. Every workplace uses Mac Pro's desktops as the computer of choice for Avid and Final Cut Pro (PC are used but not nearly as much). This is a very alarming article saying Apple is questioning the future of the Mac Pro. I know it is from a rumor site (Apple Insider/MacRumors), but hopefully it is just a rumor. I would love to see the industry continue to use Apple with computers that have the expandability and power that the Mac Pro offers. Options to use numerous products from companies such as Blackmagic, Avid, M-Audio, G-technology and AJA would not be an option on any other computer they currently make. I'm all for computers being smaller and better, but its not there yet! It also wont be for a while, there are still very large rooms with lots of equipment used to make Tv shows and Film/Video Production.